California Codes

Cal. Labor Code § 3600 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Liability for the compensation provided by this division, in lieu of any other liability whatsoever to any person except as otherwise specifically provided in Sections 3602, 3706, and 4558, shall, without regard to negligence, exist against an employer for any injury sustained by his or her employees arising out of and in the course of the employment and for the death of any employee if the injury proximately causes death, in those cases where the following conditions of compensation concur:

(1)Where, at the time of the injury, both the employer and the employee are subject to the compensation provisions of this division.

(2)Where, at the time of the injury, the employee is performing service growing out of and incidental to his or her employment and is acting within the course of his or her employment.

(3)Where the injury is proximately caused by the employment, either with or without negligence.

(4)Where the injury is not caused by the intoxication, by alcohol or the unlawful use of a controlled substance, of the injured employee. As used in this paragraph, “controlled substance” shall have the same meaning as prescribed in Section 11007 of the Health and Safety Code.

(5)Where the injury is not intentionally self-inflicted.

(6)Where the employee has not willfully and deliberately caused his or her own death.

(7)Where the injury does not arise out of an altercation in which the injured employee is the initial physical aggressor.

(8)Where the injury is not caused by the commission of a felony, or a crime which is punishable as specified in subdivision (b) of Section 17 of the Penal Code, by the injured employee, for which he or she has been convicted.

(9)Where the injury does not arise out of voluntary participation in any off-duty recreational, social, or athletic activity not constituting part of the employee’s work-related duties, except where these activities are a reasonable expectancy of, or are expressly or impliedly required by, the employment. The administrative director shall promulgate reasonable rules and regulations requiring employers to post and keep posted in a conspicuous place or places a notice advising employees of the provisions of this subdivision. Failure of the employer to post the notice shall not constitute an expression of intent to waive the provisions of this subdivision.

(10)Except for psychiatric injuries governed by subdivision (e) of Section 3208.3, where the claim for compensation is filed after notice of termination or layoff, including voluntary layoff, and the claim is for an injury occurring prior to the time of notice of termination or layoff, no compensation shall be paid unless the employee demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that one or more of the following conditions apply:

(A)The employer has notice of the injury, as provided under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 5400), prior to the notice of termination or layoff.

(B)The employee’s medical records, existing prior to the notice of termination or layoff, contain evidence of the injury.

(C)The date of injury, as specified in Section 5411, is subsequent to the date of the notice of termination or layoff, but prior to the effective date of the termination or layoff.

(D)The date of injury, as specified in Section 5412, is subsequent to the date of the notice of termination or layoff.

For purposes of this paragraph, an employee provided notice pursuant to Sections 44948.5, 44949, 44951, 44955, 72411, 87740, and 87743 of the Education Code shall be considered to have been provided a notice of termination or layoff only upon a district’s final decision not to reemploy that person.

A notice of termination or layoff that is not followed within 60 days by that termination or layoff shall not be subject to the provisions of this paragraph, and this paragraph shall not apply until receipt of a later notice of termination or layoff. The issuance of frequent notices of termination or layoff to an employee shall be considered a bad faith personnel action and shall make this paragraph inapplicable to the employee.

(b)Where an employee, or his or her dependents, receives the compensation provided by this division and secures a judgment for, or settlement of, civil damages pursuant to those specific exemptions to the employee’s exclusive remedy set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 3602 and Section 4558, the compensation paid under this division shall be credited against the judgment or settlement, and the employer shall be relieved from the obligation to pay further compensation to, or on behalf of, the employee or his or her dependents up to the net amount of the judgment or settlement received by the employee or his or her heirs, or that portion of the judgment as has been satisfied.

(c)For purposes of determining whether to grant or deny a workers’ compensation claim, if an employee is injured or killed by a third party in the course of the employee’s employment, no personal relationship or personal connection shall be deemed to exist between the employee and the third party based only on a determination that the third party injured or killed the employee solely because of the third party’s personal beliefs relating to his or her perception of the employee’s race, religious creed, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 385 cases (40 in the last 5 years), 1944–2026 · leading case: Lee v. West Kern Water Dist., 81 Cal. Comp. Cases 966 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lee v. West Kern Water Dist., 81 Cal. Comp. Cases 966 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 5× “Conditions of compensation Labor Code section 3600 provides that, with exceptions, workers’ compensation liability exists “in lieu of any other liability whatsoever” “against an employer for any injury sustained by his or her employees arising out of and in the course of the…”

Rojo v. Kliger, 801 P.2d 373 (Cal. 1990). · cites it 4× “, Lab. Code, §§ 3600, 3601 [workers' compensation law declared the "exclusive remedy" for work-related injuries]; see generally Shoemaker v.”

King v. CompPartners, Inc., 423 P.3d 975 (Cal. 2018). · cites it 3× “" ( Lab. Code, § 3600, subd. (a).) Labor Code section 3602 underscores the point: "Where the conditions of compensation .”

Light v. Cal. Dep't of Parks & Rec., 221 Cal. Rptr. 3d 668 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017). · cites it 2× “( Lab. Code, § 3600, subd. (a)(1).) The employee, in turn, is generally prohibited from pursuing any tort remedies against the employer or its agents that would otherwise apply.”

Santa Rosa Junior Coll. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., 708 P.2d 673 (Cal. 1985). · cites it 6× “The college seeks review of the board's decision. *351 DISCUSSION As the employer, the college is liable for the death benefits provided under the act only if Smyth's accident arose "out of and in the course of the employment" and if certain "conditions of compensation" were…”

Singh v. Southland Stone, U.S.A., Inc., 31 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 554 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “The Workers’ Compensation Exclusivity Rule Precludes an Award of Damages for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (1) Applicable Law Workers’ compensation ordinarily provides the exclusive remedy for an injury sustained by an employee in the course of employment and…”

Hunter v. Up-Right, Inc., 864 P.2d 88 (Cal. 1993). · cites it 4× “( 2 Cal. App.4th at p. 404 .) Of further concern in the shaping of remedies for wrongful termination has been the existence of the workers' compensation system, with its exclusive remedy provisions.”

Newland v. Cnty. of L. A., 234 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). · cites it 3× “) The Smith court noted that an employee " 'is performing service growing out of and incidental to his employment' ( Lab. Code, § 3600 )" under the worker's compensation statutes when the employee "engages in conduct reasonably directed toward the fulfillment of his employer's…”

Robles v. Agreserves, Inc., 158 F. Supp. 3d 952 (E.D. Cal. 2016). · cites it 2× “2d 559 (1994) (citing Cal. Labor Code § 3600 (a)); Jones v. Department of Corrections & Re *974 hab.”

Green v. City of Oceanside, 194 Cal. App. 3d 212 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “CITY'S actions in this respect were willful. CITY acted with the intent to cause GREEN financial harm, severe emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation.”

Gantt v. Sentry Ins., 824 P.2d 680 (Cal. 1992). · cites it 2× “" (Lab. Code, § 3600, subd. (a).) Further, "[w]here the conditions of compensation" exist, the right to recover such compensation is the "exclusive remedy" for injury or death of an employee against the employer or coemployee acting within the scope of his or her employment.”

Cole v. Fair Oaks Fire Prot. Dist., 729 P.2d 743 (Cal. 1987). · cites it 2× “*154 When Cole was injured, Labor Code section 3600 [3] provided in pertinent part: "Liability for the compensation provided by this division, in lieu of any other liability whatsoever to any person.”

Show all 385 citing cases →

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(a) — 10 cases

Robles v. Agreserves, Inc., 158 F. Supp. 3d 952 (E.D. Cal. 2016). “2d 559 (1994) (citing Cal. Labor Code § 3600 (a)); Jones v. Department of Corrections & Re *974 hab.”

Love v. Motion Indus., Inc., 309 F. Supp. 2d 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2004).

Wilson-Combs v. California Dep't of Consum. Affairs, 555 F. Supp. 2d 1110 (E.D. Cal. 2008).

Hoa v. Riley, 78 F. Supp. 3d 1138 (N.D. Cal. 2015).

Maxwell v. Comm'r, 95 T.C. 107 (Tax Ct. 1990).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(a)(2) — 1 case

Bagatti v. Dep't of Rehab., 67 Cal. Comp. Cases 528 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(a)(3) — 1 case

Pac. Operators Offshore, LLP v. Valladolid, 565 U.S. 207 (2012).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(a)(7) — 1 case

Franklin v. Indus. Comm'n, 791 N.E.2d 1171 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(a)(8) — 1 case

Smith v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., 52 Cal. Comp. Cases 162 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(a)(9) — 2 cases

Meeks v. Eddy Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 884 P.2d 534 (N.M. Ct. App. 1994).

California Capital Ins. Co. v. Repub. Underwriters Ins. Co. (N.D. Cal. 2020).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(b) — 5 cases

Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. ConocoPhillips Co., 546 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2008).

Heaton v. Kerlan, 166 P.2d 857 (Cal. 1946).

Robbins v. Yellow Cab Co., 193 P.2d 956 (Cal. Ct. App. 1948).

Dalgleish v. Holt, 237 P.2d 553 (Cal. Ct. App. 1952).

Travelers Prop. v. Tosco Corp. (9th Cir. 2008).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(c) — 2 cases

Robbins v. Yellow Cab Co., 193 P.2d 956 (Cal. Ct. App. 1948).

Dalgleish v. Holt, 237 P.2d 553 (Cal. Ct. App. 1952).

— Cal. Labor Code § 3600(d) — 1 case

Pac. Freight Lines v. Indus. Accident Comm'n, 157 P.2d 634 (Cal. 1945).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.